Sutta entitle and numbering in AN

Hi all,

I found that there are some problems in AN suttas entitle and numbering. Could you please have a look on these?

AN 1.1–5 [AN 1.1.1–5] Cittapariyādāna [Rūpādi] 1–2 should be under the title Cittapariyādāna [Rūpādi] 1–5, because there are 5 suttas in this part.
AN 1.6–10 [AN 1.1.6–10] Cittapariyādāna [Rūpādi] 1-20 should be under the title Cittapariyādāna [Rūpādi] 6-10, because there are 5 suttas in this part.
AN 1.16–20 [AN 1.2.6–10] Nīvaraṇa­ppahāṇa 1–20 should be under the title Nīvaraṇa­ppahāṇa 6-10, because there are 10 suttas in this part.
AN 1.21–30 [AN 1.3.1–10] Akammanīya 1–20 should be under the title Akammanīya 1-10, because there are 10 suttas in this part.
Also, many other titles is wrong numbered this way, at least in AN 1.

Especially, in Kāyagatāsati Vagga (AN 1.575-615), these suttas numbering from table of content and the content is different.
AN 1.586–590 from table of content is corresponding to 586 in the content only.
AN 1.591–592 from table of content is corresponding to 587–​588 in the content.
AN 1.593–595 from table of content is corresponding to 589–​591 in the content.
AN 1.596–599 from table of content is corresponding to 592–​595 in the content.
AN 1.600–615 from table of content is corresponding to 596–​615 in the content. This content numbering is wrong because there are only 16 dhammas (i.e, 16 suttas) mentions in this paragraph but 596–​615 are 20 suttas.

Thank you.

1 Like

Thanks so much for pointing this out.

The problems here arise from the fact that in this series of texts it is not always easy to determine how the suttas should be numbered, so different sources vary. Of course, while we can note such differences, we should strive to be consistent and clear in ourselves so these should be cleared up.

Another issue is that these “ranges” of suttas are included because they are counted separately in the Pali texts, yet they have parallels in Chinese and Sanskrit that have the same content, but arranged as one sutta. Because of the way our data has been organized, we didn’t have a good way of representing this situation, hence the clumsiness.

We are currently revising our whole data structure, and we aim to resolve all such issues. So bear with us for a little while.

2 Likes